News

Secretary Becerra’s Extreme Legal Position Prioritizes Protecting Substantiated Abusers Over Victims Washington, D.C. — In a new letter , House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Subcommittee on Health Chair Brett Guthrie (R-KY), Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA), Representative Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-IA), and Representative August Pfluger (R-TX) asked Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Xavier Becerra to provide the Committee with the legal basis requiring HHS to redact or hide the names of researchers determined to have committed sexual misconduct.  The letter comes following Secretary Becerra’s appearance before the Subcommittee on Health during which he claimed he could not release the names of individuals determined to have committed sexual harassment to Congress because of legal prohibitions. The Members requested that Secretary Becerra provide the Committee with the legal basis for HHS’s decision to redact the names of abusers who have substantiated findings of sexual harassment or abuse by April 30, 2024.  CLICK HERE to read the letter.  BACKGROUND :  The Committee first launched an investigation into the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) handling of sexual harassment at grantee institutions in August 2021.   In October 2023, the Committee expanded its inquiry to include complaints involving NIH scientists.   After NIH’s failure to comply, Chair Rodgers subpoenaed NIH Director Monica Bertagnolli to produce documents in February of 2024.  Later that month, HHS responded on behalf of NIH to offer a rolling in camera document review to the Committee. Documents presented in the review have been highly redacted, including the redaction of the names of individuals convicted of criminal offenses, public news articles about individuals who have been found guilty of harassment, and redaction of the names of the institutions where the abuse occurred—preventing the Committee from understanding if NIH continues to fund work performed by substantiated abusers at other institutions—a practice known as “pass the harasser.”  FULL TIMELINE :  August 10, 2021 : E&C Republican Leaders Question NIH’s Handling of Sexual Harassment Complaints   August 11, 2022 : E&C Republican Leaders follow up with NIH on Insufficient Response to its Letter on the NIH’s handling of Sexual Harassment   November 30, 2022 : E&C Republicans to NIH: Turn Over Previously Requested Information Ahead of New Congress   March 14, 2023 : E&C Republicans Press NIH for Information on Handling of Sexual Harassment Complaints   October 6, 2023 : E&C Republicans Signal Intent to Issue Subpoenas to Obtain Information on NIH’s Handling of Sexual Harassment if Questions Go Unanswered   January 26, 2024 : Chair Rogers notifies NIH of Imminent Subpoecana   February 5, 2024 : Chair Rodgers Subpoenas NIH for Documents Related to Investigation into Sexual Harassment at NIH and NIH Grantee Institutions  February 20, 2024: HHS Responds on behalf of NIH to offer a rolling in camera document review to the Committee. Documents produced in the review have been highly redacted, including the redaction of the names of individuals convicted of criminal offenses, public news articles about individuals who have been found guilty of harassment, and redaction of the names of the institutions where the abuse occurred—effectively preventing the Committee from understanding if NIH continues to fund work performed by substantiated abusers at other institutions—a practice known as “pass the harasser.”  April 16, 2024 : E&C Republicans Expand Investigation into Sexual Harassment at NIH to now Include Review of HHS Office of Civil Rights Compliance Role  WHISTLEBLOWERS:    The Committee is seeking whistleblowers with knowledge of sexual harassment at the NIH or NIH grantee institutions, as well as those with knowledge of how the NIH handles such complaints.   The right for public employees to communicate with Congress, in their private capacities, is established in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. In addition, various U.S. laws prohibit retaliation against whistleblowers for providing information to Congress. However, individuals still take serious risks when they engage in whistleblowing activity.   To better protect your communications, do not contact the Committee using work resources, work contact information, or while you are working . Further, consider consulting an attorney experienced in representing whistleblowers before you make a disclosure.   Do not submit classified information or other information barred from release through this form or by email. Unauthorized handling of classified information could result in criminal prosecution.   The Committee respects your need to remain confidential and will use your contact information only to follow up with you regarding your submission. You may submit a disclosure anonymously. However, please be aware that anonymous disclosures may limit the Committee’s ability to respond to the information that you provide.   Individuals with information about harassment at the NIH may contact the Committee via email at:   ReportNIHAbuse@mail.house.gov    Individuals with information about harassment at institutions that receive NIH grants may contact the Committee via email at:   ReportNIHGranteeAbuse@mail.house.gov    Additional resources can be found HERE . 

Washington, D.C. — In a new letter to the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response (ASPR), House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Subcommittee on Health Chair Brett Guthrie (R-KY), and Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA) raise questions about the ASPR’s mismanagement of the Strategic National Stockpile (SNS).  KEY LETTER EXCERPT :  “ The Committee is alarmed by a pattern of fiscal mismanagement and a series of failed acquisitions that have left the SNS dangerously under resourced and likely underprepared to respond to future public health emergencies . Over the last year, ASPR let over $850 million in emergency supplemental funding for the SNS go unused. These funds were eventually rescinded by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) due to a lack of appropriate planning and urgency by ASPR. This recission occurred despite ASPR regularly expressing concerns to Congress about adequately funding the resupply of the SNS after the COVID-19 pandemic. This Committee responded to ASPR’s concerns by increasing the authorization of SNS funding in its reauthorization of the Pandemic All-Hazards Preparedness Act. Similarly, the Fiscal Year 2024 Labor, Health, and Human Services Appropriation Bill also increased funding for the SNS. As such, the failure to commit funds in a timely and competent manner is particularly frustrating. Moreover, the continued procurement dysfunction at ASPR puts remaining SNS funds, as well as funds for advance research and development, at risk of future recission by OMB .”  BACKGROUND :  Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response Dawn O’Connell has made it a primary goal to “restore and maintain the public health emergency capacity that has been severely strained by the pandemic including replenishing the Strategic National Stockpile.”  The SNS plays a critical role in ensuring America is prepared against chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear threats, as well as pandemics and emerging infectious disease outbreaks.  Despite this apparent prioritization, in 2022, the non-partisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) placed the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) management of public health emergencies, of which ASPR is a leading sub-agency, on its high-risk list of government programs that “are vulnerable to waste, fraud, abuse, or mismanagement, or in need of transformation.”  In making this determination, the GAO raised concerns about ASPR’s ability to manage the SNS and medical countermeasure contracts.  On May 2, 2024, the GAO published a report outlining ongoing challenges for managing the SNS, noting that public health emergency coordination remains on its “High Risk List.”  The Chairs asked Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response Dawn O’Connell for answers to a series of questions related to ASPR’s past and future contracting processes, policies, and decisions to ensure our nation is prepared and ready to respond to health security threats. The Committee requested answers by May 21, 2024.  CLICK HERE to read the full letter.

Washington D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) delivered the following opening remarks at today’s Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee hearing titled “Examining Accusations of Ideological Bias at NPR, a Taxpayer Funded News Entity.”  “Like everyone here in this room, I am an adamant supporter of the First Amendment to the Constitution and the freedom of the press. “As Thomas Jefferson once said, 'Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.’ “Every news outlet and network should be free to express viewpoints, even those I may disagree with. “It is a fundamental principle under the First Amendment for news agencies to report on stories however they see fit. “It is not, however, a fundamental principle for news organizations to receive public funding to express their viewpoint. “We are holding this hearing today to discuss accusations from within National Public Radio, or NPR, that the organization’s DC bureau is actively censoring viewpoints—all while enjoying funding from Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars. “Following the accusations, Speaker Johnson and I fully agreed that Congress needed to quickly investigate. “I will note for the record, we invited NPR’s CEO, Ms. Maher, to participate in today’s hearing. She has declined to do so stating that she needed more time to prepare and that she had a conflict with an NPR board meeting.” ACCESS TO TAXPAYER FUNDING IS NOT A RIGHT “It is especially troubling that an organization funded with taxpayer dollars has mocked, ridiculed, and attacked the very people who fund their organization. “As if the problem wasn’t self-evident, a 25-year veteran of NPR’s national news desk outlined it in an op-ed just a few weeks ago. “Uri Berliner, a longtime journalist and senior business editor for NPR since 1999, has described a troubling culture at the organization stating 'An open-minded spirit no longer exists within NPR, and now, predictably, we don’t have an audience that reflects America.' “Berliner also explained how tax-funded NPR never admitted to its audience how off its reporting was on the debunked Russia collusion story stating 'What’s worse is to pretend it never happened, to move on with no mea culpas , no self-reflection. Especially when you expect high standards of transparency from public figures and institutions, but don’t practice those standards yourself. That’s what shatters trust and engenders cynicism about the media.’” VIEWPOINT DISCRIMINATION AT NPR “It was quite revealing from Mr. Berliner that NPR did not want to report stories that could help President Trump’s chances of winning the 2020 Presidential Election—no matter how evidently true or important to the public conversation they were, according to Mr. Berliner: 'I listened as one of NPR’s best and most fair-minded journalists said it was good we weren’t following the laptop story because it could help Trump.’ “Moreover, according to Mr. Berliner, he could not find a single registered Republican editor at NPR headquarters. “Since many journalists don’t affiliate themselves politically so they can remain objective, this might not sound abnormal, except that Mr. Berliner was able to identify 87 editors in NPR’s newsroom who were registered Democrats. “Founding NPR Board Member Bill Siemering put into the original mission statement that NPR should, among other things, 'speak with many voices and many dialects.' “According to what we’ve learned from Mr. Berliner’s insight, today’s NPR has strayed from their core mission. “When an entity that was created by Congress, and that receives taxpayer funding, strays from their core mission there needs to be accountability and oversight. “The Energy and Commerce Committee will fulfill its responsibility to investigate the allegations against NPR and take appropriate action based on what we find. “That process takes a step forward with today’s hearing. “I thank our panel of witnesses, who bring to the table a variety of viewpoints about the matter, and I look forward to the conversation.” 

Washington D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA) delivered the following opening remarks at today’s subcommittee hearing titled “Examining Accusations of Ideological Bias at NPR, a Taxpayer Funded News Entity.”  IDEOLOGICAL BIAS AT NPR “Thank you to our witnesses who are before us today to testify on National Public Radio, NPR.  “I do have to note for the record that we invited NPR’s CEO, Katherine Maher who declined to appear today to discuss NPR’s alleged past efforts to pressure conservative and moderate voices into silence.  “Hopefully, we can work out a time for her to appear and testify before this Committee in the near future.  “The only reason not to appear in front of the Committee at some point in the near future is if the allegations are both true and NPR doesn’t care. “Last month, longtime NPR business editor, Uri Berliner, wrote an article published by conservative news website, The Free Press, accusing his then-employer of having an 'absence of viewpoint diversity.'  “Berliner criticized NPR for not reflecting the viewpoints of all Americans.  “Instead, Berliner wrote, NPR is 'the distilled worldview of a very small segment of the U.S. population,' meaning the people clustered around coastal cities and college towns.  “It was alleged that, in recent years, NPR’s extremely progressive viewpoints are evident in its coverage of major news stories.   “For example, just a couple of days ago, in an article on a recent bill regarding TikTok and foreign owned social media, the author claimed that Congress had no ‘direct evidence' that Tik Tok was a threat.  “That’s simply not true.  “If NPR had listened openly and fairly to comments TikTok’s own CEO made before this Committee last year, they would know there was no real firewall between the Chinese Communist Party and the American company.  “They also fail to mention the three-hour security briefing before the Committee took up the bill.  “That type of biased viewpoint affects the way I look at NPR’s coverage of ongoing antisemitic riots at universities across the country.”  NPR’S LEFTWING WORLDVIEW   “NPR’s coverage of these chaotic protests has been borderline encouraging, nostalgic even, evoking the good old days of protesting Vietnam.  “NPR reporters have dismissed evidence suggesting external groups have had a role in coordinating these protests, despite contrary reporting by outlets like the Wall Street Journal.   “As far back as 2005, NPR editors were aware of and trying to address a question that was bothering listeners: how truly national is NPR?  “For those in rural communities and in smaller towns, like the folks I represent, nationally produced NPR news programs are not relevant and not of interest.  “Nationally produced NPR news programs often simply do not broadcast content that reflects their values, and culture.  “As a result of adopting a mostly progressive framing in so much of its reporting, NPR is losing its audience.  “At its peak in 2017, NPR had over 30 million weekly listeners. By 2022, NPR had lost 6.6 million weekly listeners.  “As a result, NPR has had a substantial budget deficits and layoffs including 10 percent of its staff.  “What was intended to be a media organization that brought together millions of Americans across geographic, socio-economic, and ideological boundaries to discuss life, the arts, and culture, has turned into what appears to be a progressive propaganda purveyor. Using our taxpayer dollars, no less.  “Now, to be clear, the local public radio station affiliates are not what I am talking about. I would make the distinction that they often have more responsive programming and local public interest and civic stories.  “I have generally thought that the local public radio stations in my part of Virginia mostly provide a public service and in many cases are useful in helping to preserve local heritage.”  TAXPAYERS ARE FUNDING NPR   “NPR claims federal spending accounts for less than one percent of its annual operating budget.  “Although NPR receives one percent in direct federal grants, local radio stations may use any portion of their federal grant from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, to pay NPR’s membership dues and programming fees. That figure is roughly 30 percent of NPR’s revenue.  “This hearing is a chance for us to take stock of whether we should be using federal taxpayer dollars to promote one ideology to the exclusion of others.  “If NPR wants to create a one-sided ideological content that marginalizes a substantial portion of Americans, they can fight it out with all the other media companies for market share and pay for it on their own dime.  “I would prefer NPR to return to its original mission under the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, to provide objectivity and balance in coverage of controversial subjects.  “To me that means representing many different opinions in its newsgathering.” 

Americans deserve to have their sensitive health information protected. Energy and Commerce Republicans have been actively working since the February 21st cyberattack on Change Healthcare to understand how it happened, how it can be prevented in the future, and how to help Americans continue to access care.  THE PROBLEM Change Healthcare is one of the largest health payment processing companies in the world. It acts as a clearing house for 15 billion medical claims each year—accounting for nearly 40 percent of all claims. The cyberattack that occurred in February knocked Change Healthcare—a subsidiary of the behemoth global health company UnitedHealth—offline, which created a backlog of unpaid claims. This has left doctors’ offices and hospitals with serious cashflow problems—threatening patients’ access to care. It has since come to light that millions of Americans may have had their sensitive health information leaked onto the dark web, despite UnitedHealth paying a ransom to the cyber attackers. E&C ACTION From the outset, Members on Energy and Commerce have been working with the administration and Change Healthcare to help providers—particularly smaller and rural practices—maneuver through the new, complicated process of getting reimbursed, so they could keep their doors open and focus on caring for patients. Energy and Commerce Republicans were briefed by the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and Change Healthcare in the weeks following the attack. Following the briefings, bipartisan Energy and Commerce leaders wrote to UnitedHealth seeking answers about the attack. The Subcommittee on Health convened a hearing on May 17th to explore cybersecurity vulnerabilities in the health care sector and discuss possible solutions to address them. This week, the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee called UnitedHealth CEO Sir Andrew Witty to explain to the American people what happened in the lead up to and during the attack, how the company is responding, and how it plans to prevent such an attack from happening again. WHAT WE LEARNED 1. The attack occurred because UnitedHealth wasn’t using multifactor authentication [MFA], which is an industry standard practice, to secure one of their most critical systems.  Mr. Witty:   We're continuing to investigate as to exactly why MFA was not on that particular service. It clearly was not. I can tell you I'm as frustrated as you are about having discovered that and as we've gone back and figured out how this situation occurred.    Change Healthcare came into the organization toward the end of 2022 after the timing of the declarations you just described.    Change Healthcare was a relatively older company with older technologies, which we had been working to upgrade since the acquisition. For some reason, which we continue to investigate, this particular server did not have MFA on it.   2. It’s estimated that a third of Americans had their sensitive health information leaked to the dark web as a result of the attack.  Oversight Subcommittee Chair Morgan Griffith: "Substantial proportion of the American population." What does that mean? How much are we talking? 20 percent? We talking 50 percent? We're talking 70? Tell us.   Mt. Witty:   Chairman, we continue to investigate the amount of data involved here. We do think it's going to be substantial. Because we haven't completed the process, I'm hesitant to be overly precise on that and and be wrong in the future. I wouldn't like to mislead anybody in that regard.   Chair Griffith:   Well, and I wouldn't want you to mislead us either. But when you say "substantially," at least give me some kind of a range. You can be on the bottom to high. I don't mind giving you a range. Are we talking 20 to 50?   Mr. Witty:   I think maybe a third or somewhere of that level.   3. This might not be the end of the leaks. Despite UnitedHealth paying a ransom to the criminals, it cannot guarantee that more of Americans’ sensitive information will not be leaked.  Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers:   How were the hackers communicating with UnitedHealth to get the ransom? Did you communicate ever directly with the hackers?   Mt. Witty:   I did not. No. Chair Rodgers:   How much did you pay in ransom? And how was it paid it? In dollars? Bitcoin or other cryptocurrency?   Mr. Witty:   $22 million in Bitcoin.  Chair Rodgers:   What was the date that you paid the ransom?   Mr. Witty:   I'm sorry. I don't have that to mind. But I can certainly get back to you with that.   Chair Rodgers:   Can you affirmatively say that the hackers you paid did not make copies of protected or personal data and then, at a later date, uphold it onto the internet or the dark web.   Mr. Witty:   I cannot affirmatively say that. No. 4. UnitedHealth has resources to help individuals and providers.  Dr. Burgess:   Is there a generally available website or telephone number that a practice can call right now, if they're continuing to have a problem?  Mr. Witty: Yes. And thank you very much for the question. So [ https://support.changehealthcare.com/ ] is the best website for anybody to access, whether it being a provider or an individual.    But, also I would very much like to note the 1-800 number that's available for individuals to call if they have any questions at all about data or anything like that.    So, it's 1 (866) 262-5342. That service line is available and makes available very quickly is a very simple process. If anybody wants things like credit protection, identity theft protection, those services are all available to be enrolled on just through a simple phone call.   CLICK HERE to watch the full hearing. Check out some of the news coverage from the hearing: UnitedHealth’s handling of the situation will probably be “a case study in crisis mismanagement for decades to come,” said Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.  Witty fielded heated questions from Senators on the House Energy and Commerce Committee about the company's failure to prevent the breach and contain its fallout.  Pressed for details on the data compromised, Witty said "maybe a third" of Americans' protected health information and personally identifiable information was stolen.  Members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee asked Witty why the nation's largest health care insurer did not have the basic cybersecurity safeguard in place before the attack. "Change Healthcare was a relatively older company with older technologies, which we had been working to upgrade since the acquisition," Witty said. "But for some reason, which we continue to investigate, this particular server did not have MFA on it."  Rep. Gary Palmer (R., Ala.), in an afternoon hearing held by the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, pressed Witty on how many government employees with security clearance were included in the breach. That kind of theft would be a national-security risk, he said.  Still, Rep. Earl L. “Buddy” Carter, R-Ga., railed against the company’s use of vertical integration, in which it has acquired physician practices, pharmacy benefit managers and other players in the health care system. “Let me assure you that I’m going to continue to work to bust this up,” Carter said.“This vertical integration that exists in health care in general has got to end.”  Several members also took the opportunity to chide United Healthcare’s use of prior authorization, which Witty said resumed for its Medicare Advantage plans April 15.   The company should “carefully review how that prior authorization” has affected patient outcomes, said Rep. John Joyce, R-Pa. 

Washington D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) delivered the following opening remarks at today’s Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee hearing titled “Examining the Change Healthcare Cyberattack.”  CHANGE HEALTHCARE MUST PROTECT ITS USERS “Thank you, Mr. Witty, for agreeing to testify before us today. “Like Chair Griffith, I was disappointed your organization declined our original invitation to testify on the cyberattack on Change Healthcare—one of your subsidiary companies—before our health subcommittee but appreciate your cooperation in being here today. “Most Americans have likely never heard of Change Healthcare, despite how crucial its functioning is to ensuring their access to care. “Change acts as a clearing house for 15 billion medical claims each year—that means more than roughly 50 percent of all claims pass through Change. “15 billion patient interactions with the health care system. “That covers everything from routine checkups with primary care physicians to lifesaving cancer treatments with specialists: things we, until recent weeks, probably took for granted. “In 2022, your company acquired Change Healthcare as part of a growing creep into every corner of our health care system. “Under the United Health Group umbrella, resides an insurance company with more than 40 million covered lives across Medicare, Medicaid, and commercial markets; a PBM that managed 159 billion dollars in drug spending last year; a provider group that owns roughly one in every twelve doctors in the United States; and a bank that makes payday loans to providers to name just a few of the ventures under your purview.  “I say this to emphasize the massive responsibility that comes with your position, Mr. Witty. “When a family of four that is being crushed by inflation forks over more than twenty thousand dollars per year for their health insurance, when a senior citizen sees the AARP brand on your Medicare product, when the taxpayer funnels tens of billions in subsidies to your company, there is a reasonable expectation that they will get a baseline level of value for their hard-earned money. “But I'll set the bar higher: You have a responsibility to protect the data of the people who have put their trust in you. “And I'll put it bluntly. In this case, you failed.” CONSEQUENCES OF THE CYBERATTACK “On February 21 of this year, Change Healthcare announced it was hit with a cyberattack, severely disrupting the health care ecosystem for providers, payers, and patients. “It has been more than two months since this cyberattack, and, according to your company’s own website, Change has yet to fully restore its services, and many negative impacts for the health care system persist. “As your written testimony lays out, criminal hackers gained access to Change Healthcare through 'compromised credentials’, remotely accessing the company’s portal nine days before your company publicly announced the ransomware attack. “This portal did not have multi-factor authentication enabled—a relatively basic protection against cyberattacks—which allowed the cyber criminals to unlock the door and break into your systems. “Multi-factor authentication would be a basic expectation for a company handling the breadth of sensitive information that Change Healthcare does. “It has now been reported your company paid a ransom to the cyber criminals. “While I have grave concerns with the precedent you created by rewarding the criminals, I understand that it would be a difficult decision to weigh that against protecting Americans’ data. “But here’s the problem: it did not stop the data leak. “Americans personal and private health information is on the dark web. “This is private health data you were responsible for protecting. “Mr. Witty, I suspect that decision will be a case study in crisis mismanagement for decades to come.” THE FALLOUT IS STILL AFFECTING PROVIDERS “I would be remiss if I didn’t note that providers—especially smaller providers and solo practitioners—continue to provide uncompensated care as submitted claims cannot be processed through payers. “It’s been reported that some providers have contemplated closing, and others have been forced to rely on volunteers to care for patients. “Others have had to furlough staff so their employees can apply for unemployment benefits. “I look forward to hearing how this is going to be fixed as soon as possible. “I’ll note in closing that we’re here today to learn more about what happened in the lead up and during the attack, and what you, Mr. Witty, are doing to fix it and prevent it from happening again. “The American people—particularly the millions who rely upon Change’s services and those whose information was leaked—deserve answers.” 

At the direction of Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), Energy and Commerce Republicans are launching an investigation of allegations of rampant bias at NPR, which is funded by U.S. taxpayers. Check out this exclusive coverage in Fox News:  FIRST ON FOX : The House Energy & Commerce Committee is summoning the head of NPR before Congress to answer accusations the outlet has a left-wing bias despite receiving federal funds. Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., directed House Republican leaders to open the probe, he told Fox News Digital. "The Committee has concerns about the direction in which NPR may be headed under past and present leadership. As a taxpayer funded, public radio organization, NPR should focus on fair and objective news reporting that both considers and reflects the views of the larger U.S. population and not just a niche audience," Committee Chairwoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., wrote to NPR CEO Katherine Maher. She led Morgan Griffith, R-Va., chair of the subcommittee on oversight, and Bob Latta, R-Ohio, chair of the subcommittee on communications and technology, in asking Maher to publicly testify before Griffith’s panel next week.  [...]  Johnson told Fox News Digital of the probe, "In light of the recent, disturbing revelations about National Public Radio (NPR) and its leadership, I’ve directed Chair McMorris Rodgers and the Energy and Commerce Committee to conduct an investigation of NPR and determine what actions should be taken to hold the organization accountable for its ideological bias and contempt for facts. The American people support the free press but will not be made to fund a left-leaning political agenda with taxpayer funds."  Conservatives have long accused NPR of reporting with a left-wing bias while some of its funding is provided through federal grants and other government-backed dollars.  Those concerns were recently magnified when former NPR editor Uri Berliner asserted in an op-ed that the outlet mishandled critical stories that stemmed from Hunter Biden’s laptop hard drive and COVID-19 lab leak theories, among others, and that registered Democrats were vastly overrepresented in the newsroom, 87-0. "We also find it disconcerting that NPR’s coverage of major news in recent years has been so polarized as to preclude any need to uncover the truth. These have included news stories on matters of national security and importance, such as the Mueller report, the Hunter Biden laptop, and the COVID-19 origins investigation. On each of these issues, NPR has been accused of approaching its news reporting with an extreme left-leaning lens," the lawmakers wrote. They also took issue with Maher’s own past statements, including a 2021 TED Talk in which she said, according to the letter, "Our reverence for the truth might be a distraction that’s getting in the way of finding common ground and getting things done." "You yourself have stated that you view the First Amendment as ‘the number one challenge’ because speech protections make it ‘tricky’ to suppress ‘bad information’ and the ‘influence peddlers who have made a real market economy around it.’’ Ironically, both you and NPR have used the same First Amendment to protect your own views and statements," they wrote. CLICK HERE to read the full story on Foxnews.com. CLICK HERE to read the letter to Ms. Maher.

Washington, D.C. — Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA) delivered the following opening statement at the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic hearing titled “A Hearing with the President of EcoHealth Alliance, Dr. Peter Daszak.” Given ongoing coordinated efforts, Committee Leaders from the House Energy and Commerce Committee were permitted to participate in the hearing.  Prepared remarks below:  “I want to thank Chairmans Comer and Wenstrup, Ranking Members Raskin and Ruiz for having this hearing today and inviting relevant E&C Chairs and Ranking Members to it.  “For over a year now, we have been working together, to investigate the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic and the role that National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), headed by Dr. Fauci, and EcoHealth, headed by Dr. Daszak, may have played in it by funding research and facilitating the transfer of technologies to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, henceforth known as ‘Wuhan.’  “It is critical that we understand what went wrong at NIAID and EcoHealth’s relationship with Wuhan.  “Frankly, it’s been alarming to discover that NIAID’s approval and oversight of risky experiments involving potential pandemic pathogens is so lax.  “My hope is that, when we are finished, we have a package of legislative proposals and other recommendations on biosafety and biosecurity.  “I increasingly think that means taking final approval authority for these experiments away from NIAID and other funding in favor of an independent entity.  “With so many lives lost and disrupted by what I believe was a research related accident. We need transparent, effective oversight and tight regulation of gain-of-function research of concern.  “We certainly do not have that now.  “I participated in Dr. Daszak’s transcribed interview.  “It’s clear to me that neither NIAID nor EcoHealth have a complete picture of what Wuhan was up to with its coronavirus collection, or with their gain-of-function research trajectory.  “But what we do know from EcoHealth’s NIAID grant, the DEFUSE proposal, and the private musing of virologists who collaborated with Wuhan is not comforting.  “We don’t have this critical information in large part because NIAID’s review and oversight was a farce.  “NIAID and EcoHealth were completely asleep at switch.  “In my opinion, they were grossly negligent.  “I find it incomprehensible that NIAID continues to fund EcoHealth’s collaboration with Wuhan to this very day.  “EcoHealth’s grant was reinstated so that they could process virus samples and sequences that had been previously collected.  “It turns out many of those viruses and sequences are held by Wuhan.   “NIAID didn’t even think to ask them where the samples were stored before restarting funding.  “Even after COVID-19, it’s just business as usual. It's absurd and it’s got to change, or we risk having—perhaps—yet another high consequence accident.  “We have to put some adults in place to independently review proposed gain of function research of concern that NIAID and other agencies want to fund.  “Thank you, again, Mr. Chairman.  “I look forward to continuing to work together and I yield back.” 

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Subcommittee on Communications and Technology Chair Bob Latta (R-OH), and Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA) wrote to NPR CEO Katherine Maher regarding reports of political and ideological bias at the taxpayer-funded public radio organization. In addition to requesting answers to questions, the letter requests Ms. Maher appear before the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee for a hearing on May 8, 2024. "The Committee has concerns about the direction in which NPR may be headed under past and present leadership. As a taxpayer funded, public radio organization, NPR should focus on fair and objective news reporting that both considers and reflects the views of the larger U.S. population and not just a niche audience," the Chairs wrote.   They continued , "We also find it disconcerting that NPR’s coverage of major news in recent years has been so polarized as to preclude any need to uncover the truth. These have included news stories on matters of national security and importance, such as the Mueller report, the Hunter Biden laptop, and the COVID-19 origins investigation. On each of these issues, NPR has been accused of approaching its news reporting with an extreme left-leaning lens." “In light of the recent, disturbing revelations about National Public Radio (NPR) and its leadership, I’ve directed Chair McMorris Rodgers and the Energy and Commerce Committee to conduct an investigation of NPR and determine what actions should be taken to hold the organization accountable for its ideological bias and contempt for facts. The American people support the free press but will not be made to fund a left-leaning political agenda with taxpayer funds.” said Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) regarding the effort. CLICK HERE to read the letter.